If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I thought abt this y'day..

..what if BWF were to implement 2 different ranking systems.
One would be for the overall WR (which they can use something close to Choice #3, avg-pts-per tourney format w/a required minimum no. of tourneys, say a min. of 6 SS tourneys is required to be ranked).
And the other would be just for the seeding purpose (they can use the current system, by accummulating pts from tourneys).
But then, i can see a player like LD still not competing in as many tourneys as required.

^^Hmm..^^

Not better. The ranking system works because every players play for one and only one objective, that is to win all tournament for themselves.

..unfortunately, the driving force behind tennis is not the same as in badminton..and yes, that's $$$...

And it goes back to the age old discussion in this forum of when will baddy tourneys start to provide incentives or offer prize-money like tennis...

Lower ranked players would definitely love to play as independents, but knowing the prize money given to those eliminated in R16 or QF in reg. tourneys or even SS are so minimal to almost none, what's the incentive for them to play in more tourneys??..
How about 2nd or 3rd or 4th or 5th place finishers??..how much would they get??..
Reality is, the majority of baddy players still need funding from national team simply because they can't really survive by playing independently. Not in the current economics of pro badminton.

Only players like Taufik (who has a good financial backing) would probably enjoy it. LD, maybe not before he became the top player as today.

Originally Posted by BadFever

...
System-2 (call Player Of The Year xxxx) get US$5,000,000.
No. 1 - Dato LCW (only if he can maintain his ranking points till end of the year)

..Dato LCW is already limping on one leg and the yr is not even over yet.....Where would they get that $5,000,000 sponsorship??..

Given what has been said about the poor incentives for lower ranked players, do you think that BWF should prohibit higher ranked players (say WR1 to WR50) from participating in GPs or the like. This will prevent them from depriving lower ranked players from earning some hard-earned money.

It all goes back to the money issue..

Originally Posted by drifit

you have remind me of an old chinese saying.
"limping one leg for the rest of time, you still able to survive 3 generations"

now, who said badminton not enough earnings?

- Only players like LCW or LD or TH or CJ can most likely earn those prize money. How about the incentives for the rest of the lower ranked players??..
- Dato LCW is still being taken care of by BAM (and the tax payers lah). He's not fully independent and can fully take care of his baddy career..

Originally Posted by Loh

Given what has been said about the poor incentives for lower ranked players, do you think that BWF should prohibit higher ranked players (say WR1 to WR50) from participating in GPs or the like. This will prevent them from depriving lower ranked players from earning some hard-earned money.

- As for BWF putting a cap on higher ranked players in GP or GP Gold type tourneys, i think they could do it but i'd suggest up til WR#20 or 25. Further, if they're not going to allow those higher ranked players to compete in GP or GP Gold tourneys, then they should increase the prize money of the higher ranked tourneys (SS type) or increase the no. of SS tourneys (and keep the same amt of prize money).
If they don't increase the prize money for the higher ranked tourneys, some higher ranked players could complain that BWF is being discriminatory by not allowing them to play in other tourneys...and on and on..

- Speaking of prize money being offered, I'll give another example of how far apart tennis is in comparison to badminton. Take a look at this ATP 250 level tourney that's currenty in M'sia. http://www.malaysianopentennis.com/event_facts.html.
Check out the prize money being offered ($947,750) and there are only 28 players competing. If one were to divide the prize money with the number of players competing, equally, at least each player will get around $34,000 (of course that's not going to happen because there are 2 different events).
I'm not sure what's the equivalent of that ATP 250 to one of BWF's tourneys, but my guess is it's similar to one of BWF's lower ranked tourneys. Compare that prize money with the current GP tourney (one of the lower ranked tourneys), in badminton, where it only offers a min. prize money of $50,000 (over 5 different events)....Imagine that and we're supposed to see badminton players going pro/independent??..

- Only players like LCW or LD or TH or CJ can most likely earn those prize money. How about the incentives for the rest of the lower ranked players??..
- Dato LCW is still being taken care of by BAM (and the tax payers lah). He's not fully independent and can fully take care of his baddy career..

- As for BWF putting a cap on higher ranked players in GP or GP Gold type tourneys, i think they could do it but i'd suggest up til WR#20 or 25. Further, if they're not going to allow those higher ranked players to compete in GP or GP Gold tourneys, then they should increase the prize money of the higher ranked tourneys (SS type) or increase the no. of SS tourneys (and keep the same amt of prize money).
If they don't increase the prize money for the higher ranked tourneys, some higher ranked players could complain that BWF is being discriminatory by not allowing them to play in other tourneys...and on and on..

- Speaking of prize money being offered, I'll give another example of how far apart tennis is in comparison to badminton. Take a look at this ATP 250 level tourney that's currenty in M'sia. http://www.malaysianopentennis.com/event_facts.html.
Check out the prize money being offered ($947,750) and there are only 28 players competing. If one were to divide the prize money with the number of players competing, equally, at least each player will get around $34,000 (of course that's not going to happen because there are 2 different events).
I'm not sure what's the equivalent of that ATP 250 to one of BWF's tourneys, but my guess is it's similar to one of BWF's lower ranked tourneys. Compare that prize money with the current GP tourney (one of the lower ranked tourneys), in badminton, where it only offers a min. prize money of $50,000 (over 5 different events)....Imagine that and we're supposed to see badminton players going pro/independent??..

or just look at the tennis us open vs. badminton us open at like ocbc the former talks in the millions I think it was 21 mil total prize money or something? and the badminton us open not even half a million.

.For Badminton, the World Rankings are more important to the players than to their fans.

If we were to talk about the lower ranked players, we are talking about whether they are granted entries to participate in certain tournaments.

If we were to talk about the higher ranked players, we are talking about their seedings whenever they participate in a tournament.
.

actually
for me
wr is simple
determine the seed
determine who need to play in qualify round
thats all
what more so important？

Originally Posted by Deathsticks

tennis ranking is kinda simple

the players get points by playing tournys
diff tournys give diff amount of points
grand slams being the highest
players only gain points
and never lose points

and i think they gain points by matches?

so,any different with bwf?

Originally Posted by Loh

Given what has been said about the poor incentives for lower ranked players, do you think that BWF should prohibit higher ranked players (say WR1 to WR50) from participating in GPs or the like. This will prevent them from depriving lower ranked players from earning some hard-earned money.

yes
i do agree with this
any player that in top 28 cannot attend gp gold,top 44 cannot attend gp
can?

Hmm..

Originally Posted by limsy

...
yes
i do agree with this
any player that in top 28 cannot attend gp gold,top 44 cannot attend gp
can?

why only top 28 can attend GP Gold? why not top 30 or top 20? what's the basis?
why only top 44 can attend GP? why not top 40 or top 50? what's the basis?
what if higher ranked players complain they are not given enough tourneys to participate in/earn money?

any player that in top 28 cannot attend gp gold,top 44 cannot attend gp
can?

Originally Posted by ctjcad

why only top 28 can attend GP Gold? why not top 30 or top 20? what's the basis?
why only top 44 can attend GP? why not top 40 or top 50? what's the basis?
what if higher ranked players complain they are not given enough tourneys to participate in/earn money?

top 28 is the main draw player in ss
so they CANNOT attend gp gold,i didnt wrote can
top 44 is 28（main draw）+16(qualify round)
8 ss+4 grand slam+1 ss master final
and team event.
not enough？

Hmm..

top 28 is the main draw player in ss
so they CANNOT attend gp gold,i didnt wrote can
top 44 is 28（main draw）+16(qualify round)
8 ss+4 grand slam+1 ss master final
and team event.
not enough？

- Those 28 players in the main draw are not necessarily ranked WR1 to WR28 in the world. The 28th player in the main draw could be ranked 30 or 40 or even 60 in the world.
- Same thing with the top 44 players in the main draw. Not all of them are ranked WR1 to WR44 in the world.
- Are you expecting all players to attend every single tourney & go injury free for the whole yr? Take for example Julia Wong. She's injured and can't compete in half of this yr's tourneys.
- Team events do not provide prize-money; only can get through national body/people's tax money mah, if the team wins...
- IMO, it's both not enough tourneys and prize money being offered. Even if they're enough, how many players can attend all of them and be happy with the prize money being offered?
Would you, limsy, go and participate in a $50,000 tourney knowing well if you get eliminated in R32 or R16, you have a small chance to earn $200 or even less?